Approval near for PG&E deal with Solaren for space-based solar power

[bananas]

Just saw this - reported Friday:

http://hobbyspace.com/nucleus/?itemid=17030

Approval near for PG&E deal with Solaren

Regulators seem ready to approve the plan by PG&E to sign a contract to buy power from Solaren, which intends to implement a space based solar power system by 2016. The approval means that PG&E can assign the Solaren power to its required quota of renewable energy sources: Regulators Propose OK Of PG&E Space-Based Solar Deal - WSJ.com.

Note that PG&E is not investing any money in Solaren. The contract between PG&E and Solaren only becomes active if and when Solaren starts providing power. The regulators indicate that since there are "concerns regarding the viability of the project", PG&E should have other suppliers available to meet its renewable energy requirements in case Solaren fails to come through.

Posted 11/20/09 | 22:03:56 by TopSpacer | Filed under: Space Technology

From the WSJ article:

http://online.wsj.com/article/BT-CO-20091120-713779.html
* NOVEMBER 20, 2009, 7:30 P.M. ET

CORRECT: Regulators Propose OK Of PG&E Space-Based Solar Deal

("Calif Regulators OK PG&E Contract For Space-Based Solar Power," published at 4:38 p.m. EST, misstated the nature of action by regulators. A corrected version follows).

SAN FRANCISCO (Dow Jones)--California regulators have proposed approving a long-term contract between PG&E Corp.'s (PCG) utility and developers of a speculative technology that would beam 200 megawatts of solar power to earth from outer space.

Under the 15-year contract, Solaren Corp., of Manhattan Beach, Calif., would ship 850 gigawatt-hours of solar power a year starting in 2016, doubling that amount in later years. The power would be sent by radio frequency from an earth-orbiting satellite to a receiving station in Fresno, Calif. The energy-conversion technology has been used by communications satellites for 45 years on a much smaller scale, Solaren said.

PG&E wouldn't disclose the cost of the proposed 15-year contract but said it would be above-market, more than 12.9 cents a kilowatt-hour, according to documents filed with the California Public Utilities Commission, or CPUC.

<snip>

The CPUC could make a decision as early as December 3.

[leveymg]

1. What a great idea, if it didn't punch a nice big hole in the ozone layer.

I seriously wouldn't want to be anywhere near Fresno, CA when they crank this one up.

[Dead_Parrot]

2. That's waaaay down list of things to worry about

In terms of raw power, the incoming energy from this would be around 1.6 W/m² - That's about the equivalent of holding a cell phone at arms length. Not exactly huge.

I don't know why you think it would affect the ozone layer: It's safe to assume they will be using a frequency that isn't absorbed by the atmosphere (because let's face it, the thing wouldn't work otherwise). Although curiously, if they did get it wrong, it would probably repair the ozone layer, not damage it - see http://cat.inist.fr/?aModele=afficheN&cpsidt=3391075

[bananas]

5. It is a great idea - this has been studied extensively by NASA and others

NASA even had birds fly in wind-tunnels in the beams.
California has the highest environmental regulations in the country.
PG&E has done its due diligence on this - it should be able to clear all regulatory hurdles.
Japan is planning to build a large 1GW space-based solar power station by 2030.

[excess_3]

3. very hard to believe .nt

[tinrobot]

4. Slow earth's warming by beaming more energy towards it.

Even on a small scale, it's still the equivalent of putting mirrors in space to reflect more light towards the surface. Instead of visible light, however, this method converts the solar energy to microwaves and reflects those towards the surface.

Regardless of much of these microwaves you collect, you will not be able to collect them all. The net result is that the planet gets more energy from the sun than it was supposed to get. I don't see how that helps with global warming.

It's much cheaper to collect the solar energy that's already falling the planet anyways. Terrestrial solar power also doesn't add energy to the ecosystem. Let's focus on that first before going into space.

[OKIsItJustMe]

7. Well… now let’s think about this for a moment…

If you capture solar power on the surface, rather than reflecting it back into space, you’re clearly adding energy to the Earth. (PV panels typically produce more energy in the form of waste heat than in electricity. Waste heat associated with a concentrating solar plant is obvious.)

On the other hand, the power beamed to Earth from an orbiting solar plant shouldn't have a lot of terrestrial waste heat…

[kristopher]

8. Have you been reading SuperFreakonomics?

http://www.treehugger.com/files/2009/10/do-solar-panels-actually-contribute-to-climate-change.php

I know you support solar, but I wanted to add a bit to your comment. Another point besides what is presented at the link is that the total amount of land area subject a change in albedo is extremely small in relation to the normal flux of albedo change that occurs on a routine basis - it is really lost in the noise, so to speak. As with most other critiques of solar the significance of this effect in the debate is over rated relative to its significance in the science.

[OKIsItJustMe]

9. No, I haven't

However, if it's valid to worry about heating up the planet by beaming down space-based solar power, then heating up the planet with land-based solar panels would (logically) be worse.

I agree that the heat (in either case) isn’t significant.


I usually tell people that our problem is not that we’re generating heat, but that we’re preventing our planet from releasing heat into space.

[joshcryer]

10. Maybe they were reading some Nordell.

[OKIsItJustMe]

11. Color me ignorant

Nordell?

[Dead_Parrot]

13. Don't go there

Some, err, discussion a while back on a paper by one Bo Nordell that suggested that the heat rise had nothing to do with greenhouse gasses, but was the waste heat from all our power stations (and volcanoes). Old fashioned ideas like Plank's Law and the air being transparent at some frequencies were overturned by a dramatic new paradigm in thermodynamics. Or something.

Search E/E for "Nordell" if you must, but be prepared to floss your brain out afterwards in case the stupid gets stuck.

[OKIsItJustMe]

14. Oh, OK, right, yes… thanks…

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=115&topic_id=201429&mesg_id=201439

[zeaper]

6. This was a common science fiction theme

Classic science fiction authors like Robert Hielien, Isaac Asimov and Arthur C. Clark used this idea in several stories.

This method has significant advantages over ground based solar, no clouds, no night no dust or snow to cover the collectors and best of all no atmosphere to block energy.

[NickB79]

12. ROFL

They almost have approval to sign a contract to buy power from a company that hasn't yet built or launched a satellite, and they will only say the electricity will be priced "above-market."

More power to them, but damn they have a long way to go.